If a girl is raped and pregnant, should she keep the baby?

Page 61 of 94 [ 1500 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64 ... 94  Next

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

21 Sep 2011, 3:38 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Didn't you say that I couldn't find a dictionary outside of some 'pro-life crackpot group' that would say a fetus = child. It didn't take me ten minutes after seeing that statement in your post to prove you didn't know what the heck you were talking about as usual.
All you did was find an outdated definition, misinterpret it and quote it removing context.

Quote:
Sorry but a dictionary that hasn't been altered by the political correct looney fringe says otherwise.

IT IS POLITICALLY CORRECT IT MUST BE WRONG.

Sorry, but disregarding any reality that disagrees with you as part of a mass conspiracy against republicans is a very unhealthy behavior.


It is not a conspiracy to point out the leftist progressives have a tendency to pull stunts like that, they aren't even consciously aware that they do it.

Vexcalibur wrote:
Are you sure you are not skipping some pills?


:roll:

Vexcalibur wrote:
Quote:
Again you don't know what you are talking about. I consider black people to be human beings and I consider the child in the womb to be a human being, so stop making up garbage to try to claim that children are somehow not human.

We know what your unjustified beliefs are. I knew your intention when making that comparison. However, when you claim the debate of abortion is equivalent to the race debate you are implicitly stating that you believe black people and fetuses are equivalent in your scale of "things with rights". That is a very terrible thing you are saying and is equivalent to dehumanizing black people. That you are not aware that what you are saying is terrible does not make it better, it actually makes it worse.


Whatever... Your theatrics aren't going to work on me or any other conservative here, it may work on liberals here, but Conservatives have seen this enough to not take you seriously.

Vexcalibur wrote:
Of course, in reality we do know that is not really what you believe. You were just trying to pull a very cheap argument to justify your idea that women should be forced to do with their bodies what YOU want. So, the terrible implications of your argument are unintentional. You are not really racist, you are just your standard conservative pushing for a misogynistic law. But you should be more careful.


So you're still not going to acknowledge the fact that by definition a fetus is a child. Due to their genetics they are a human. Furthermore we see brain activity 48 days into pregnancy. The fact their brain is still growing is immaterial, their brain is functioning, and that functional ability improves at a rapid rate.

Vexcalibur wrote:
Quote:
The fetus is a human child as you well know, so stop comparing human children to a chimpanzee, or rodents.
Depending on the stage of development. The human fetus may not even be as complex as a rat. Rat has voluntarily movement, and that is not something that can happen up till the 25-th week. And we are only arguing for making abortion legal until around the 10-ish week.


The fact you can't even understand how what you're saying is dehumanizing human beings makes me pity you.

Vexcalibur wrote:
You may want me to go politically correct and call it a human child just so you don't feel bad. Well, unfortunately , PC is crap. A 10-ish week fetus is really mindless and killing it , although surely messy and not optimal as a solution (an optimal solution is not getting pregnant in the first place) should be legal, because after-all it is the mother's body.


Didn't you claim I couldn't find a dictionary that would equate fetus with child outside of Fox News or some prolife group? Didn't I prove you wrong, with the first dictionary I picked up. :lol:

Vexcalibur wrote:
Quote:
By definition the being you are claiming is not human, is human due to their genetic code.

Human DNA is not holy. Sperm have unique human DNA. So yes, the fetus has human DNA. It is not a human being and not a person. It is human (adjective) it is not a human. Just like human skin cells are human (adjective) skin cells and we don't panic over dandruff.


Sperm is not viable until it is combined with the egg, you and I both know that. Skin cells are dead and dying human cells that have reached the end of their natural lifetime. Seriously, stop with the false equivalencies, or do a better job at it, right now an elementary school student could see right through your farce.

Vexcalibur wrote:
Quote:
According to the dictionary as I have pointed out, the fetus is a human child that is still inside the womb.

Your dictionary defines a fetus as unborn offspring. It says nothing about it being a child. Definitely nothing about it being a human child. Or a human being or a person. Even your 1970 dictionary agrees with everyone else but you. Although you can delude yourself into thinking otherwise, it is not healthy.


Are you going to continue to lie as usual. I didn't just look up "fetus", I looked up "child" and the definition is on page 233 of the dictionary, and I am going to quote the definition again.
child:
1. Any person between birth and puberty. 2. a. An unborn infant; fetus. b. An infant; a baby. 3. One who is childish or immature. 4. A son or daughter; an offspring. 5. Plural. In Biblican usage members of a tribe; decendents. 6. The figurative offspring of anything; a child of nature. -- with child. Pregnant....


The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, editted by William Morris, pg 233
Published by: American Heritage Publishing co., inc. and Houghton Mifflan Company c. 1970

If you're going to lie, you should know better than to attempt to lie about the contents of a book that I have sitting less than 3 feet from me.

Vexcalibur wrote:
Quote:
That's like saying murders are going to happen anyways so we should make it legal to murder people...

The slope is so slippery! I am in fear!


Sorry but since infanticide = murder, it can't be a slippery slope.

Vexcalibur wrote:
So, is the only thing between you and going on a murdering rampage that murder is illegal? That's good to know.


It's actually cause unlike you, I value human life from conception till natural death.

Vexcalibur wrote:
But do admit it. You are right that making murder illegal has definitely not stopped murder. It is more of a punitive thing and a way of asking for retribution for emotional and economical harm the murder causes, and jailing murderers in theory makes them less likely to commit murder again. That is the reason murder is a crime. Abortion on the other hand, doesn't seem to work that way. The victim, in the case of 10 weeks things, is clearly not a person or a human being. The embryo does not have any people depending on it for survival. The only person which would have an emotional problem with its death is the one making the decision. And on top of that, the fetus existence will mean a life risk to the pregnant woman, and serious health problems related to donating her body to the process of hosting the fetus.


The fact we are having a huge population shrinkage from abortion is also affecting the economy in a negative fashion, so your argument doesn't work.

@ Vigilans

Grow up.



pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

21 Sep 2011, 4:14 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
It's actually cause unlike you, I value human life from conception till natural death.

:roll:
You most certainly do not.

Inuyasha wrote:
The fact we are having a huge population shrinkage from abortion is also affecting the economy in a negative fashion, so your argument doesn't work.

:roll:
There are fewer mouths to feed, and less crime, both of which affect the economy in a positive fashion.

Inuyasha wrote:
@ Vigilans

Grow up.


:roll: This time, I am really going to tell your mother on you.



TheFangirl
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 18 Sep 2011
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 56
Location: NY

21 Sep 2011, 4:17 pm

Why are we arguing about whether or not fetuses are human or living? Of course they are both. The question is whether or not they are people.

Personally speaking, I do not value all human life and I'm not sure why I even should.


_________________
I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. I don't need to be forgiven.


number5
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,691
Location: sunny philadelphia

21 Sep 2011, 4:18 pm

65 pages, lol.

Inuyasha wrote:
@ Vigilans

Grow up.


@Vigilans

Please don't. We need the amusement. :)



Lecks
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2009
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,987
Location: Belgium

21 Sep 2011, 4:22 pm

TheFangirl wrote:
The question is whether or not they are people.

That is what they've been bickering about, actually. The whole fetus vs baby thing.


_________________
Chances are, if you're offended by something I said, it was an attempt at humour.


Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

21 Sep 2011, 4:37 pm

TheFangirl wrote:
Why are we arguing about whether or not fetuses are human or living? Of course they are both. The question is whether or not they are people.

Personally speaking, I do not value all human life and I'm not sure why I even should.
Is is human (adjective) it is not a human being and is not a person either. Nobody is currently arguing about whether it is ALIVE! or not right now.

Inuyasha wrote:
Whatever... Your theatrics aren't going to work on me or any other conservative here,
Yes, for once you are right. Those who call themselves conservative in the US don't mind looking like racists.

Quote:
So you're still not going to acknowledge the fact that by definition a fetus is a child.
The dictionary quote you posted is clear. A fetus is not a child. It is an unborn, undeveloped version of a child.

Quote:
Sperm is not viable until it is combined with the egg
And for the 666th time I reply that embryos are not viable unless the host is compatible and has energy and willness to let them become fetus. And fetuses are not viable by themselves either.

Quote:
Sorry but since infanticide = murder, it can't be a slippery slope.
Except it is not infanticide. Even the dictionary you are quoting disagrees.

And newer, more accurate , less ambiguous definitions from actual scientific sources interested only in defining things rather than also including alternative uses make it even harder for people like Inuyasha to confuse things up:
http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art ... lekey=3424
Quote:
Fetus: The unborn offspring from the end of the 8th week after conception (when the major structures have formed) until birth. Up until the eighth week, the developing offspring is called an embryo.


Regardless. Although dictionaries themselves have always been on the side of non-lunacy and have never confused terms like fetus or child. It doesn't matter. We can find tons of biological ways to differentiate between both (For starters how a fetus is not even born). The differences are so obvious, that it takes one to be an Inuyasha-level loon to believe they are the same thing or to believe that the very own 1970 dictionary he is quoting agrees.

It is my mistake that I asked for any dictionary definition because dictionaries include idioms and it is a common idiom used by ignorant people like Inuyasha to refer to a pregnant lady as a child container, so your dictionary had to include information that the term child may be used by idiots to refer to a fetus, just in case someone is very confused by the wrong usage by Inuyasah and opens the dictionary to verify if there is an alternative usage he is missing. Of course, pointing out this idiom usage is just being informative. You seem unable to understand that 1. Is the actual definition of child whilst the other are alternative uses. I didn't count on Inuyasha being too dumb to know how to use a dictionary, my mistake.

Inuyasha's own dictionary wrote:
child: 1. Any person between birth and puberty.

Note how his dictionary is dated 1970, so it is before the mass media conspiracy of feminazis editing dictionaries for politically correct reasons happened.


_________________
.


Last edited by Vexcalibur on 21 Sep 2011, 5:02 pm, edited 9 times in total.

TheFangirl
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 18 Sep 2011
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 56
Location: NY

21 Sep 2011, 4:43 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
TheFangirl wrote:
Why are we arguing about whether or not fetuses are human or living? Of course they are both. The question is whether or not they are people.

Personally speaking, I do not value all human life and I'm not sure why I even should.
Is is human (adjective) it is not a human being and is not a person either. Nobody is arguing about whether it is ALIVE! or not.
I agree it's not a person and not a human being. It's human in the same way cancer cells are human. Genetically it has to be human, but that doesn't give it value.


_________________
I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. I don't need to be forgiven.


Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

21 Sep 2011, 5:52 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
@ Vigilans

Grow up.


Master of Irony


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

21 Sep 2011, 6:05 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Blah blah blah abortion
The fact we are having a huge population shrinkage from abortion is also affecting the economy in a negative fashion, so your argument doesn't work.
Blah blah blah

so population increase is good (but not when it comes from south of the border.)
Extra folks help the economy (unless they are mexican?)


_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

21 Sep 2011, 6:28 pm

JakobVirgil wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Blah blah blah abortion
The fact we are having a huge population shrinkage from abortion is also affecting the economy in a negative fashion, so your argument doesn't work.
Blah blah blah

so population increase is good (but not when it comes from south of the border.)
Extra folks help the economy (unless they are mexican?)


:roll:

Most of the people coming over the border from Mexico are doing so illegally. I'm okay with immigration, as long as it is done LEGALLY!

Vexcalibur wrote:
Note how his dictionary is dated 1970, so it is before the mass media conspiracy of feminazis editing dictionaries for politically correct reasons happened.


What is with you and your aversion to telling the truth? The second definition in that same dictionary given for child completely destroys your statements.
child:

1. Any person between birth and puberty. 2. a. An unborn infant; fetus. b. An infant; a baby. 3. One who is childish or immature. 4. A son or daughter; an offspring. 5. Plural. In Biblican usage members of a tribe; decendents. 6. The figurative offspring of anything; a child of nature. -- with child. Pregnant....

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, editted by William Morris, pg 233
Published by: American Heritage Publishing co., inc. and Houghton Mifflan Company c. 1970

Every fetus is a child, by definition. This flies in the face of everything you've run around claiming, I've shown you are wrong and still you run around lieing. You said I couldn't find any dictionary that would define a fetus as a child, well the fact fetus is in the definition of child, looks like a fetus is a child.

You are wrong Vexcalibur, and it is time for you to admit it.

Furthermore I really don't care about modern medical terms at this point, because of course doctors would want to believe they aren't killing a human being when they are conducting an abortion so they can sleep at night.

The fact about the child being a human being is tantamount to overturning Roe v. Wade, if the child is considered a person, Roe v. Wade has to be re-examined and possibly thrown out.

Also another key fact to consider, when someone murders a pregnant woman and also kills the infant, they are charged with a double homicide, yet it is okay for an abortionist to murder the child while they are in the womb. You can't have it both ways.



pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

21 Sep 2011, 6:30 pm

Inuyasha wrote:

Also another key fact to consider, when someone murders a pregnant woman and also kills the infant, they are charged with a double homicide, yet it is okay for an abortionist to murder the child while they are in the womb. You can't have it both ways.


:roll:
Yes, you can.



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

21 Sep 2011, 6:32 pm

pandabear wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:

Also another key fact to consider, when someone murders a pregnant woman and also kills the infant, they are charged with a double homicide, yet it is okay for an abortionist to murder the child while they are in the womb. You can't have it both ways.


:roll:
Yes, you can.


Where does this sound familiar, oh yeah sounds like counting slaves as people in to get the South more seats in Congress, but the slaves aren't considered people in any other way. The 3/5th's rule if I remember correctly that was striken from the US Constitution.



pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

21 Sep 2011, 6:39 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
pandabear wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:

Also another key fact to consider, when someone murders a pregnant woman and also kills the infant, they are charged with a double homicide, yet it is okay for an abortionist to murder the child while they are in the womb. You can't have it both ways.


:roll:
Yes, you can.


Where does this sound familiar, oh yeah sounds like counting slaves as people in to get the South more seats in Congress, but the slaves aren't considered people in any other way. The 3/5th's rule if I remember correctly that was striken from the US Constitution.


:roll:
Completely separate issue.



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

21 Sep 2011, 6:41 pm

pandabear wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
pandabear wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:

Also another key fact to consider, when someone murders a pregnant woman and also kills the infant, they are charged with a double homicide, yet it is okay for an abortionist to murder the child while they are in the womb. You can't have it both ways.


:roll:
Yes, you can.


Where does this sound familiar, oh yeah sounds like counting slaves as people in to get the South more seats in Congress, but the slaves aren't considered people in any other way. The 3/5th's rule if I remember correctly that was striken from the US Constitution.


:roll:
Completely separate issue.


Just cause you can't figure out how the two issues are related doesn't mean they aren't related.



pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

21 Sep 2011, 6:42 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
pandabear wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
pandabear wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:

Also another key fact to consider, when someone murders a pregnant woman and also kills the infant, they are charged with a double homicide, yet it is okay for an abortionist to murder the child while they are in the womb. You can't have it both ways.


:roll:
Yes, you can.


Where does this sound familiar, oh yeah sounds like counting slaves as people in to get the South more seats in Congress, but the slaves aren't considered people in any other way. The 3/5th's rule if I remember correctly that was striken from the US Constitution.


:roll:
Completely separate issue.


Just cause you can't figure out how the two issues are related doesn't mean they aren't related.


:roll:

The issues aren't related.



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

21 Sep 2011, 6:45 pm

pandabear wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
pandabear wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
pandabear wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:

Also another key fact to consider, when someone murders a pregnant woman and also kills the infant, they are charged with a double homicide, yet it is okay for an abortionist to murder the child while they are in the womb. You can't have it both ways.


:roll:
Yes, you can.


Where does this sound familiar, oh yeah sounds like counting slaves as people in to get the South more seats in Congress, but the slaves aren't considered people in any other way. The 3/5th's rule if I remember correctly that was striken from the US Constitution.


:roll:
Completely separate issue.


Just cause you can't figure out how the two issues are related doesn't mean they aren't related.


:roll:

The issues aren't related.


They are related, just you can't accept the fact that a child is a person regardless of whether or not they are currently in the womb, just like the South refused to recognize black people as being human beings.